Vulnerable Nuclear Power Plants [video]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/09/fukushima-anniversary-nuclear-disaster-extreme-climate-events_n_1331977.html[/video] "There are clear lessons learned from the Fukushima disaster, yet our government allows the risks to remain," said Jordan Weaver, a scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "It doesn't have to take an earthquake and a tsunami to trigger a severe nuclear meltdown. In addition to human error and hostile acts, more common occurrences like hurricanes, tornadoes and flooding -- all of which took place around the country last year -- could cause the same type of power failure in U.S. plants."
An open Bering Strait blocks off sudden swings in climate By Scott K. Johnson The Bering Sea Land Bridge as it existed about 15,000 years ago. You may remember 2004’s disaster movie and CGI delivery vehicle, The Day After Tomorrow. The premise of the film (which like any self-respecting disaster film, is excessively absurd) is that global warming suddenly plunges the world into the depths of an ice age. New York City drowns under the largest storm surge in history, and then flash freezes. As is the case with many disaster movies, there’s a small kernel of truth at the eye of this hurricane of exaggeration. That kernel relates to ocean circulation and the Gulf Stream. The Gulf Stream carries warm water toward Western Europe, helping to keep it more temperate than its latitude would otherwise dictate. It depends on the downward flow of dense, salty water in the North Atlantic that drives a "conveyor belt" of ocean circulation in the Atlantic. Large amounts of fresh water discharged to the North Atlantic (from melting ice sheets, for example) can clog up that overturn by decreasing the density of the surface water. Slowing down Atlantic circulation drives down temperatures in Europe and affects climate around the globe. During the most recent ice age, changes to the Atlantic conveyor system appear to have triggered bursts of extremely rapid climate change. A new study pins these changes on an event that took place elsewhere in the globe: the closing of the Bering Strait between Alaska and Russia. Although it's not able to generate cinematic quality climatic chaos, researchers think that the shutdown in the Atlantic conveyor is behind some of the most rapid climate changes visible in ice core records from Greenland—the Dansgaard-Oeschger oscillations. These events occurred in cycles roughly 1,500 years long throughout much of the last glacial period. Although North Atlantic overturning seems to be involved in these events, it’s unclear what alters the currents. It could be an external trigger (though no orbital or solar cycles really fit the bill), or it could be a sort of ice sheet heartbeat. It may be that the events can only occur when ice sheets reach a critical size, meaning that the rhythm of the cycles could be determined by the growth rate of ice sheets. Whatever the trigger is, it appears to have been absent or ineffective at the start of the most recent ice age. The last glacial period began around 115,000 years ago, but Dansgaard-Oeschger oscillations were only prevalent between 11,000 and 80,000 years ago. They didn’t appear for the first 35,000 years of the glacial period, and they haven’t been seen since it ended. A paper published this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences pins this difference on a feature that's an ocean away. It had been proposed that the Bering Strait between Alaska and Eastern Russia—which is replaced by a land bridge when sea level drops during glacial periods—could have something to do with these rapid climate shifts. So, a group of researchers set out to test the idea using the latest Community Climate System Model (CCSM3). The model was run under two scenarios—one with modern sea level and an open Bering Strait, and one with a lower sea level and a closed Bering Strait. In each, freshwater was added to the North Atlantic at a slowly increasing rate until the overturning circulation slows down, after which the freshwater input is ramped back down to zero. During the Dansgaard-Oeschger oscillations, the overturning circulation seems to show a sort of double equilibrium. One state is the normal mode, like it behaves today. That seems to collapse to a low-circulation state that can hang around for quite a while before flipping back to full strength. The simulation with an open Bering Strait couldn’t replicate this behavior. The overturning circulation would slow down, but as soon as the freshwater addition started to drop, the circulation would smoothly recover right along with it. With the Bering Strait closed, however, the circulation would collapse more quickly, hold steady there for a while, and then abruptly kick back into gear. Much like the real thing is thought to have done. The Bering Strait exerts its influence by controlling flow between the Arctic and the North Pacific. Normally, fresher water flows into the Arctic, but when freshwater is being added to the North Atlantic some of it leaks into the Arctic and out to the Pacific. That helps keep the overturning circulation in the North Atlantic from clogging up so easily. In contrast, when the Bering Strait is closed, the freshwater in the North Atlantic piles up and lingers. Beyond offering an explanation of why the Dansgaard-Oeschger oscillations happened when they did (during the period when sea level was low enough that the Bering Strait was closed off), this work also has something to say about the future. Since the Bering Strait is open today, an abrupt collapse of overturning circulation in the North Atlantic due to melting Greenland ice could be much less likely. And that’s just one more reason why the day after tomorrow probably won’t resemble The Day After Tomorrow. PNAS, 2012. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1116014109 (About DOIs). Photograph by noaa.gov Source
Warm... Cool.... Repeat! Is it possible humans have accelerated the cycle? It is plausible that we have some impact.
Global warming is a hoax concocted by Al Gore (amongst others). Al Gore has made billions selling CO2 credits.
at least cars planes nuclear plants , us bombs are making the earth like a burning land if you look at the usa map about drought there , it looks like a cuban cigar ...while it should be as white as the ass of english ;'] or sweedish or ruskies ;'] search "Current U.S. Drought Monitor"
Hi all, Any who are serious about learning about global warming should first look learn about the green house effect. it was dis-proven ~100 years ago http://toryaardvark.com/2011/07/19/greehouse-gas-theory-trashed-in-ground-breaking-experiment/ The experiment has been repeated recently by Professor Nasif Nahle http://principia-scientific.org/publications/Experiment_on_Greenhouse_Effect.pdf Other links that reinforce this fact (not theory as has been proven) http://co2insanity.com/2011/04/18/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-in-three-simple-steps/ Alan Siddons show clearly that the 1st law of thermodynamics is broken by the AGW theory. http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/why-conventional-greenhouse-theory.html unless of course if there is proof that more energy can be received from a system than is put in. ie free energy! AGW theory also posits that the upper (cooler) parts of the atmosphere back radiate heat towards the warmer lower levels of the atmosphere and the warmer earth which goes against the 2nd law of thermodynamics in that heat cannot transfer from a hotter to a colder body. climate gate1 and 2 display the lack of integrity these people are capable of and the media played this down enormously. For those who really do believe in Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming please understand that it has been used as a trojan horse to usher in global governance. The United nations are spearheading this through Agenda 21 and related methods. http://ppjg.me/2012/03/14/agenda-21-on-steroids/ Please read this and then download the UN document to verify the seriousness of this living document! Here is a pdf containing many links that verify this http://www.globalwarmingskeptics.info/attachment.php?aid=481 regards to all
I am not sure of your argument against those who would be pro-active on solutions for climate change but I can assure you that from where this 63 year old man is sitting your contribution here does the opposite of finding solutions for a very real problem .. Wake up or not. The problems have to be solved and this statement is part of the problem.. The only trojan is big oils truck loads of money headed for Washington to thwart real policy changes .. First step stop buying into big oils propaganda.. http://thinkprogress.org/climate/20...-calls-record-heat-a-one-in-16-million-event/ http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/07/07/511194/what-is-causing-the-climate-to-unravel/
I honestly would like your feedback on this So now we have an ethanol industry propped up by U.S. tax dollars that according to drought predictions will certainly have dramatic pressure on fuel prices, currently as well as future, as the price of corn sky rockets .. With no political appetite to embrace a new era of energy supply and big oil still getting their subsidies how can a push towards renewables ever emerge if the argument is I am tired of testosterone based politics .. I watched Ronald Regan take the solar collectors off the white house and roll back the tax incentives for solar and watch a solar industry that was just getting started dry up over night.. Leadership I hope something emerges soon otherwise were screwed .. and all the other egocentric B.S. just cements our demise .. So the question, is ethanol part of "support rational measures to protect and improve our environment" or part of the "expensive programs that divert resources from real needs" ?
I can guarantee you that you will be totally screwed if Romney takes office. I have never seen such massive stupidity and backwardness as exhibited by the republicans.
Policies sir, read here and here . My impression is that any Republican in office will sell out to the oil loving weirdos. I don't agree with the anthropogenic excuse given for global warming but one of the benefits of the hoodwink is that there is a definite effort being made to clean up the way energy is produced all over the world. Romney will be a backward step in my opinion.
@acrsn, Taxes are used as a deterrent much like the way they tax cigarettes. And you shouldn't mention California that is a major disaster area. And I agree ethanol is a scam much like the clean coal nonsense they keep pushing.
it is so good to find people here who are using the old grey cells, instead of consuming the media`s opinions.. palm trees used to grow on antarctica.. who the hell do we think we are, to think that we can change the climate? it has changed all by itself, since long before we were even invented.. and yes, the media have turned it into an issue.. the al gores of this world get richer. taxes rise, on fuel and things.. but we should not have the arrogance to say it is us changing the climate, imho..
@nodnar IMHO It is the epitome of arrogance to think that what we are doing does not effect the climate. I am glad to have this debate with you and others and I certainly respect your opinion __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ______ @acrsn unless I misunderstood you these statements contradict each other.. and Either we are effecting the climate of the planet or we are not.. Either we can put into motion policy that does not exacerbate the causes of global warming or not.. Irregardless of climate change we are destroying the planet we live on by short sighted policies that win the day because of money brought to influence policy outcomes by by "private enterprise".. There is no Democracy that will ever survive if it is not able to overcome the short term interests of "private enterprise" and make paramount the long term survival of a people who's goal is to preserve their health and the health of the planet.. The solar industry dried up over night because big oil thwarted the efforts, plain and simple.. That was 30 years ago, had it been left in place and given the same support big oil receives we would already have viable alternatives rather then fossil fuel based energy that is slowly killing us.. Now what we have is the latest sell job on natural gas (with fracking) which is certainly on course to destroy our ground water in the 30 years that it is supposed to last in order to bridge us to alternative energy solutions..So to me 60 years will have passed where we knew of the problem and the beginning of viable solutions were delayed by "private enterprise" as to your statement Yes and those improvements were brought about by a democracy which elected legislators that put into law the will of the people through government regulations.. The point being that hopefully we are electing lawmakers that are representing their constituents and the good of all.. If that is not the case we must continue to fight against oppression until our voices emerge uninterrupted by corruption and greed.. I am glad to have this debate with you and others and I certainly respect your opinion __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____ The topic of climate change / Global warming is something that divides people who IMHO have far more common interests and needed solutions at the present moment. This commonality and these solutions lose focus because of the division created and supported by a small percentage of very powerful people who don't have our best interest in mind, period. The resonance of such darkness can be followed through out history and casts a shadow over what would be our common good and common sense.. We have the ability to change this but only if we learn from our mistakes.. For one example the english had by the late 1500's already cut down all their trees to fuel furnaces to make weapons to what end? and then came to this country to do the same.. Source: http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/gwj/learning/history-culture/?cid=FSBDEV3_000460 This was the result of only 5 furnaces over a 25-30 year period 19,000 to 23,000 acres of forest had been clear-cut in continuous bands, to state the obvious that's a huge amount of land.. Private enterprise has won the day with such non-sense for far to long and I dare say it still persists with no end in sight.. I think with a plea to our higher self (Self) we can change this..
It's late here so this is a short post, I will say more another time. Are we, or not? It would seem to me that everything affects the planet. Mice, squirrels, etc. They eat trees or stop seedlings growing into trees. Therefore it would seems logical to accept that change is the norm and to try to keep the status quo is not and against nature itself. I agree the things that man is doing to the planet should be more controlled but in my opinion these are 2 seperate arguments that become commonly associated. And of course (IMHO) governments see the opportunity for taxation. We know so little about our planet and to say we are destroying it is arrogance itself (again IMHO). The planet has survived much worse before and will again. I stress this is not the green light for deforestation or reckless mining etc. Alarmism is a tool for the media,governments, oops, nearly forgot, BAD SCIENTISTS. I wish people could see this for themselves. I would concede we are affecting the planet but can anybody, you? give me a percentage of how much we do in comparison to natural variability? 100%, 50%, 5%? The answer is no one can because no one knows the big picture yet.
Let's get this out of the way first The first furnace (1850) put into production in the Nation where I was born (Iroquois Nation) led to the superfund site at Onondaga_Lake the heart of the Iroquois Nation.. Since then in the state of my birth not a single tributary can be fished where the fish are suitable for pregnant women and children to eat because of mercury poisoning.. In the same state thousands of acres of forest destroyed by acid rain directly attributable to unregulated emissions of smelting, power production and manufacturing.. I can go on for quite awhile on how my personal life and those of my ancestors have been dramatically altered by people who have a very narrow points of view and are unwilling to take responsibility for what they have left in the wake of their greed and short sighted profits.. All the while pointing out those bringing this to public awareness as alarmists. The only alarm I see here is yours when you see I have a different point of view then your own .. BTW IMHO being alarmed is when you come home and see your dog has puked on your new laptop. What I am talking about is systematic long term pervasive greed that has directly oppressed peoples lives and destroyed their environment and way of life.. As far as the big picture, if it hasn't come within your view draw back the curtains get up from your computer and take a real look at what man has done to the places he has inhabited where greed is the emperor of the day.. IMHO these are not 2 separate issues for me it would be like saying a fever I am experiencing has nothing to do with the flu I have been diagnosed with..
@redroad, with all due respect, i guess we must agree to disagree.. i did not say what i said because i close my eyes to what we are doing to the planet. you made some indisputable points. and i will be the last to deny it. but. whatever commercial interests and sloppy scientist are telling us, we must realise, that far more drastic things have happened to the planet and the climate before we ever even bothered to raise our hands against it. even if we manage to raise the sea level by one meter by means of our bad management, that is nothing compared to what the planet did to itself without interference from us. we`re talking about 200 meters here, over the millennia.. that is why i think that one species, in our case man, should think twice before declaring itself capable of changing the climate. that is the ultimate arrogance, we are but passengers on this old planet, imho.. even if we are plague to it..
@nodnar One point I would like to make in this discussion is the powers that be on either side of this debate are poised with all the advantages of modern technology, word smith's, influence peddler's, and propagandist's in order to make sure that our disagreements are what we talk about rather than gathering around common solutions that would effect long term change..
hm.. you may well be right there, my friend. and yes, the powers that be are well equipped to tell us what to think. it has prevented people from doing something about it, for ages. but even they are mere passengers, when all is said and done.. al gore puts his pants on one leg at a time, just like me, after all..
Passengers who sunk the ship of thousands of species and of course there is this that mere passengers have done http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awl8_dgWbng As far as Al Gore he's confused http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,55826,00.html
point taken, redroad.. please do not think i approve of pollution of any kind. i just refuse to believe in this global warming thing, and i think the powers that be want me to, because it is profitable to them..